Debate: Communism, good or bad?

Communism- can it work? Should it work? Why?


Communism is an excellent theory but focuses only on the economic aspect of things, rather than social as well, which is (imo) why every communism in the world has been a dictatorship rather than a democracy- given the chance, a communism could work well in a democracy (as long as people were convinced it was the right party to vote for) and could well be the standard economic government of the world within the next century. Not to mention the fact that it's far better than the capitalist systems in place now, especially in America where there is barely any social welfare at all!


BEAR IN MIND BEFORE YOU POST:
Countries like the USSR, China PR and North Korea are not representative of Communism as a whole. Whereas they follow some general Communist theories, they are (were) authoritarian dictatorships with Communist leanings.

Now, I'll admit I'm not a politically-minded person, so I could be very wrong in my opinions, but they're opinions, so it really doesn't matter at the moment.

With that being said, I think communism could be a rather good thing, so long as it has a good leader. The problem is, once it becomes corrupt, all is lost. O'course, I guess a lot of things are that way...

I agree. All so called communist countries have been all about domination and non-individuality which has led to a mass stereotype. But then again, democracy used to be thought of with dislike just as communism is today so maybe there will be changes in the future.

Communism- can it work? Should it work? Why?

BEAR IN MIND BEFORE YOU POST:
Countries like the USSR, China PR and North Korea are not representative of Communism as a whole. Whereas they follow some general Communist theories, they are (were) authoritarian dictatorships with Communist leanings.

Look at that first sentence...then read what you typed after 'BEAR IN MIND BEFORE YOU POST'...

The examples you give are the ONLY nations who follow any sort of Communism and they all suffer from awful human rights violations.

So, there's your answer...Nice idea, but doesn't work in practice.

Communisim is the best governing system ever created. On paper. The problem is people.

Exactly. In theory, communism is the shiznit. In reality, it's destined to fail. The only way a true communist society will ever develop is if humans evolve as a species and are ridden of their selfish nature.

But since we all know that's not going to happen, Communism doesn't seem like the best choice for running a country, does it?

Compared to what? All forms of gerverning have serious downfalls. It is simply a matter of what those without power are willing to give to those who have it. I dont believe that there is a 'best choice' to make. this is more a matter of personal philosophy.

of course it is. I agree. I meant maybe compared to a democratic society with a free market economy. I know that every kind has its downfalls and that any type of government has its corrupted people in it, Its just probably harder for them to executre their will on people in a democratic society than in a communist one.

*Shakes head*

Democratic institutions are quarantine arrangements for that ancient pestilence, lust for tyranny. As such they are very effective and very boring.

In reality, any governement claiming to be a democracy is actually a Socialist society. Democracy is another one of those things that looks good on paper but fails in practice. They only difference between it and communism is that the common people arent aware of it.

grim outlook. Unfortunately it does make sense. But I have to sit on my arse and think, "What am i gonna do about it?". Its sort of like being controlled in a way....hmm.....familiar sounding

Of course its like being controlled. That is the entire point of the government. Any government. Control the masses and maintane order. The only real difference between any of the forms of government is the amount of control and how aware of this control the people in power make the people they rule. The only answer to this is self governing, which is of course totally impracticle for the same exact reason that causes the other forms to fail: People.

I agree. Its very ironic isn't it? I'm referring to the fact that the whole Christian religion is based off the mistakes of people (i know this isn't the christian thread but gimme a sec) Everything fails because of people it seems like.

You're fucked anyway you look at it. I like Machiavelli's take on things. It's the nature of humans to seek out those things which give them pleasure while doing whatever they can to escape pain. In a state of nature - that is, a state with no government - chaos reigns. Everyone is looking to increase their pleasure, so they steal food from others and kill, doing whatever is necessary to remain on top. Because of this, people make a social contract and sacrifice their rights to a government, for it's less painful to sacrifice those rights than to live in constant fear of that googly-eyed kid bashing your head with a 2x4 for the hell of it.

To the original question no it cant work and it should not be started by another nation ever again. On paper its not even a good idea, it takes away the free market economy which has progressed things in this world many times faster than any other system would. Just look at the former U.S.S.R, it tried to compete with a free market nation (US) but only crashed and burned.

Communism would only work in a world where people are not motivated by money. Since this is not the case and I dont forsee it for many centuries, it will probaly remain "on paper" forever.

The "best" form of goverment is not in any of todays loop hole ridden types. The best form of goverment would result from a mixure of several types.

But since we all know that's not going to happen, Communism doesn't seem like the best choice for running a country, does it?

Neither is democracy really.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess of the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage.

Yes but what if the entire factor of money was taken out of play? What if everybody was allotted the exact same amount of income regardless of employment?


Good debate going on imo. ^_^

Actually, that's a rather limited view, Helios of human behaviour. HRM (Human Resource Management) sees different 'reasons' why people work. In higher functions, people no longer work primarily for the money, but rather because of the status it grants them and because they feel enhancing their skills is important.

A CEO does not work primarily at a company to make money, he has plenty. He works there because he feels he has something to offer the company and because he likes his work.

I believe communism can only work with a fully automated food production centre. It would than be the responsibility of the government to sustain and distribute the food produced, which they could do for minimal costs. This would mean food would be virtually free, and or entirely free.

Imagine going to the McDonalds, and saying you want a Big Mac, and just walk away. Perhaps there is an electronic card to register how much you eat, or something.

I, personally, would not remove valuta straight out. Rather, I would make people want to work (in higher levels of education) by awarding them with larger houses, more 'food credits', etc.

Though that might not be entirely communistic, the ideal that everyone has a house and get's food is a huge step in the 'left' direction. Alternatively, a proper educational system would do wonders too.

Mr U

Still, the whole premise of your solution there, Mr. Lecter, is based upon motivation through self-interest. No one's working for the good of the whole, but for the good of themselves. Replace the reward of money with free food, a larger house, a prestigious position - In the end it doesn't matter, because it's not money that people want. Money itself is worthless. Everyone wants the goods that can be purchased with money.

This all sounds kind of like the Star Trek world....everyone working together for the good of mankind. That kind of behavior shift would require a massive epoch across all societies.

The major problem-one of the major problems, for there are several-one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them to it to them. To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summerize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summerize the summary of the summary: people are the problem.
- The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

It is true that our western culture is aimed too much on materialistic gain, rather than the spiritual gain that would be needed to support such a society.

It is therefore my suggestion that those who do not share the materialistic nature of western society mass-murder the rest, and instate a new system of society and government, following the teachings of Nietzsche.

Mr U

Now thats something that I could certainly get behind.

We could start a pimping service and have them drink our pimp juice and combust.

i say this rarely and never without good reason...landlord... i wish you would fall into the blades of a combine harvester and be shredded into an atomic level. what part of this thread do you not understand? i wish the fickle gods of MM would smote your geeky corpse.

in addition, i beleive that a socialist alternative is possible, and Goethe's mass murder concept seems to fit the bill nicely!

I love how Landlord says that newbies should be judged according to the quality of their posts and not the fact that they're new and have a low post count.

Like I said, hes a NUG, plain and simple. And it looks like he will be a NUG for a very long time.

I am a fickle God. Smiting is fun.

And what kind of man would drink your pimp juice, Landlord? Certainly not a woman...

Everybody loves it imo...yes, even you.

Therefore I put no weight in your opinion.

Bahahaha...

Seems to me Landlord your opinion is always far, far away from the truth. So try working on that 'imo' thing a little bit more before you use it.

Now for all our sake lets get back on topic...